Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Another Company Discriminates Against Gays

Options
1…457910…57

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,817 ✭✭✭stimpson


    K4t wrote: »
    printers.png

    As much as you might like, and are entitled to, create your own narrative of events, the statement released by the company and the fact that the company has done business with the man for 4 years prior, suggests that you are incorrect in your assumption.

    There is no evidence to suggest they knew he was gay. Regardless, the discrimination is the refusal to print the invitations. Whether they discriminated against him previously or not has no bearing on their actions this time.


  • Options
    #183
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,351 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    Incorrect ........... it was entirely due to the sexual nature of the material involved.

    A wedding invitation is sexual in nature?


  • Options
    #184
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Akrasia wrote: »
    That's like saying it's OK for a bar to refuse to serve alcohol to black people because they allow them to buy roasted peanuts

    If the printer happily prints wedding invitations for Heterosexual couples, then it is discrimination to refuse a gay couple the same service

    I don't disagree with that .......... but I don't believe anybody has the right to dictate to the printer how he should run his business.


  • Options
    #185
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,351 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    K4t wrote: »
    printers.png

    As much as you might like, and are entitled to, create your own narrative of events, the statement released by the company and the fact that the company has done business with the man for 4 years prior, suggests that you are incorrect in your assumption.

    The company is discriminating now, and has admitted discriminating against others in the past.


  • Options
    #186
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,817 ✭✭✭stimpson


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I don't disagree with that .......... but I don't believe anybody has the right to dictate to the printer how he should run his business.

    Not even the government?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    stimpson wrote: »
    There is no evidence to suggest they knew he was gay. Regardless, the discrimination is the refusal to print the invitations. Whether they discriminated against him previously or not has no bearing on their actions this time.
    You've proved my point better than I did; they still might not even know he is gay! It's the belief (same sex marriage) that they are discriminating against, not the individual, or a person's sexual orientation. In a strange way, one has to admire them for sticking to their beliefs, however warped they may be. Again, the problem here is devout Catholicism. We are all culpable in this.


  • Options
    #188
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,239 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    Incorrect ........... it was entirely due to the sexual nature of the material involved.

    He clearly says it's because he disapproves of SSM!
    "We are not against homosexuals, however we do not support same sex marriage, which printing wedding invitations would do"
    .

    It's written right there in black and white for crying out loud!


  • Options
    #189
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »
    I wonder if this printer even advertised the fact that he will only print materials according to his strict religious beliefs. I'll send him some pictures from lubeyourtube and ask him to print them...

    If only he had named his printers after something in the Bible to make his beliefs clear, like Beulah or somehting


  • Options
    #190
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Akrasia wrote: »
    The company is discriminating now, and has admitted discriminating against others in the past.
    Maybe. Maybe they refused to print leaflets for a Man Utd supporters club because the owners support Liverpool. And maybe the Man Utd supporters were gay. Obviously that was discrimination based on sexual orientation. Right?


  • Options
    #191
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,817 ✭✭✭stimpson


    K4t wrote: »
    You've proved my point better than I did; they still might not even know he is gay! It's the belief (same sex marriage) that they are discriminating against, not the individual, or a person's sexual orientation. In a strange way, one has to admire them for sticking to their beliefs, however warped they may be. Again, the problem here is devout Catholicism. We are all culpable in this.

    You can't discriminate against a belief.

    They were discriminating against people because of their sexuality and playing the Christianity card as a smoke screen.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    suicide_circus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,802 ✭✭✭✭suicide_circus


    what do people suggest in practical terms? this business is forced to print the invitations or face prosecution? so then the business just intentionally does an appalling job providing unusable invitations? what then?


  • Options
    #193
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    K4t wrote: »
    printers.png

    As much as you might like, and are entitled to, create your own narrative of events, the statement released by the company and the fact that the company has done business with the man for 4 years prior, suggests that you are incorrect in your assumption.

    I can relate (in some small way) to this statement ........ I have worked along side both male & female homosexuals and got along great with them (not because they are gay but because they were nice easy to get along with people) .......... I have socialised with both male & female homosexuals and would consider them friends (not because they are gay but because they are nice friendly people) ............ I will be voting No in the referendum because I do not believe that same-sex marriages should be performed in a Catholic Church.


  • Options
    #194
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I can relate (in some small way) to this statement ........ I have worked along side both male & female homosexuals and got along great with them (not because they are gay but because they were nice easy to get along with people) .......... I have socialised with both male & female homosexuals and would consider them friends (not because they are gay but because they are nice friendly people) ............ I will be voting No in the referendum because I do not believe that same-sex marriages should be performed in a Catholic Church.

    They won't!!! They will be in registry offices, it's civil marriage!!!!


  • Options
    #195
    tonycascarino
    Registered Users Posts: 1,373 ✭✭✭tonycascarino


    The business can do what it wants. If the gay couple don't like it then just go elsewhere. Simple.


  • Options
    #196
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Akrasia wrote: »
    A wedding invitation is sexual in nature?

    Of course it is .......... although most people say that marriage kills your sex life! :)


  • Options
    #197
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    stimpson wrote: »
    Not even the government?

    Especially the Government ..........


  • Options
    #198
    Hoagy
    Registered Users Posts: 707 ✭✭✭Hoagy


    K4t wrote: »
    Again, the problem here is devout Catholicism.

    I don't think they're Catholics.


  • Options
    #199
    RWCNT
    Registered Users Posts: 1,430 ✭✭✭RWCNT


    bjork wrote: »
    And?


    They are discriminating against me by gender and sexuality

    What's your gender and sexuality? I know this isn't the first time we've discussed your desire for a sauna but I can't remember if you mentioned before.


  • Options
    #200
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    He clearly says it's because he disapproves of SSM!

    .

    It's written right there in black and white for crying out loud!

    Ok let me rephrase so ........... "it was entirely due to the homosexual nature of the material involved." :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #201
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    stimpson wrote: »
    You can't discriminate against a belief.
    Of course you can. You're doing it if you think the business should have been forced to print the invitations by law.
    They were discriminating against people because of their sexuality and playing the Christianity card as a smoke screen.
    Ah, we've moved onto the plural. So they weren't only discriminating against this individual, but all of his friends too. You've basically admitted that this wasn't discrimination based on the sexual orientation of the customer, but based on the owner's private beliefs concerning same sex marriage. You've handed them the victory.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,817 ✭✭✭stimpson


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I will be voting No in the referendum because I do not believe that same-sex marriages should be performed in a Catholic Church.

    So now that you know the Catholic Church won't have to marry gays, will you be voting yes?


  • Options
    #203
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    Bible-believing Christians who are committed to standing by our conscience and God’s Word
    Hope they keep slaves, and ensure their women are not allowed out. otherwise they wouldn't be good christians...


  • Options
    #204
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I will be voting No in the referendum because I do not believe that same-sex marriages should be performed in a Catholic Church.
    2 wrongs never make a right. Vote YES to same sex marriage and support the Catholic church's right to refuse to marry same sex couples. Let them bury themselves.


  • Options
    #205
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    eviltwin wrote: »
    They won't!!! They will be in registry offices, it's civil marriage!!!!

    It's only a matter of time ......... in any case I don't believe that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as "normal" married couples .......... adoption rights for example ......... but I'll leave that there as I don't want to de-rail the specific topic this thread.


  • Options
    #206
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    I do not believe that same-sex marriages should be performed in a Catholic Church.

    Neither does anyone else. So you can vote yes if that was your only objection, see? Or....perhaps that wasn't your only objection. Got any more for us?

    Edit: Oh right. Just seen post above. More phobias about homosexual parents *ignore, carry on regardless*.


  • Options
    #207
    MadDog76
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,162 ✭✭✭MadDog76


    stimpson wrote: »
    So now that you know the Catholic Church won't have to marry gays, will you be voting yes?

    No ....... means No!! :)

    By the way if I was a printer I would personally have no issue printing same-sex wedding invitations ........... and yet I still don't agree with same-sex marriage.


  • Options
    #208
    Cody montana
    Registered Users Posts: 5,259 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    It's only a matter of time ......... in any case I don't believe that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as "normal" married couples .......... adoption rights for example ......... but I'll leave that there as I don't want to de-rail the specific topic this thread.

    What other rights shouldn't they have?
    What has marriage got to do with adoption rights?


  • Options
    #209
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    K4t wrote: »
    Of course, and they can refuse, though the hope is that business transcends religious belief, prejudice and bigotry, and that they would agree to the request. Your example is more a reflection of how religions are not only intolerant of homosexuals, but also of each other.

    Wansee conference was far from the work of a religion. Palestinian/Israeli issue is a land question. But do not let the facts get in the way of your points.


  • Options
    #210
    stimpson
    Registered Users Posts: 7,817 ✭✭✭stimpson


    MadDog76 wrote: »
    It's only a matter of time ......... in any case I don't believe that same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as "normal" married couples .......... adoption rights for example ......... but I'll leave that there as I don't want to de-rail the specific topic this thread.

    SSM has nothing to do with adoption. That will be legal before the referendum: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/gay-adoption-law-due-before-same-sex-marriage-referendum-1.2073215

    So now will you vote yes?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    why is it always "gay rights"?

    Does no one else have any rights? Has a business not got a right to sell what it wants? Has a heterosexual not got a right to believe what they want?
    It seems the answer is No


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement